IMPACT: International Journal of Research in

Humanities, Arts and Literature (IMPACT: IJRHAL)

ISSN(E): 2321-8878; ISSN(P): 2347-4564
Vol. 3, Issue 10, Oct, 2015, 15-22
Impact Journals

EFFECT OF SPEED, AGILITY AND QUICKNESS (S. A. Q) TRAINING ON SELECTED

PHYSICAL FITNESS VARIABLES AMONG SCHOOL SOCCER PLAYERS
R. ARJUNAN
Associate Professor, Department of Physical Education & Health Sciences,
Alagappa University, Karaikudi, Tamil Nadu, India

ABSTRACT
The purpose of the study was to find out the effect of speed, agility and quickness (S.A.Q) training on selected
physical fitness variables among school soccer players. To archive this purpose of the study sixty school boys from
Alagappa Model Higher Secondary School, Karaikudi, were selected as subjects at random. The subjects chosen for the
study were divided into four equal groups called control and experimental groups consisting of sixty students, each group
consists of fifteen students. Speed, Agility and Quickness training was given to the experimental groups. The control group
was not allowed to participate in any of the special training programme except their routine practices. All the subjects of
four groups were tested on selected criterion variables such as speed, muscular strength endurance, agility and explosive
power at prior to training after the training programme by using 50 meters run, bend knee sit ups, shuttle run and standing
broad jump respectively. The Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used for interpreting the results. On the basis of the
results the impact of Speed, Agility and Quickness training has significantly contributed to improve the selected Physical
Fitness Variables such as speed, muscular strength endurance, agility and explosive power.

KEYWORDS: Training, Speed, Agility, Quickness, Physical Fitness, Soccer

INTRODUCTION
High-speed actions are known to impact soccer performance and can be categorized into actions requiring
maximal speed, acceleration, or agility (Thomas, French, & Hayes, 2009). Specific dynamic constant external resistance
exercises are highly recommended as part of an annual training program for junior soccer players. (Lebedev, 2013) Speed
is the rapidity of movement (Baechle, 1994). Top speed is important for a player such as a midfielder who must cover long
distances. To develop speed, one must increase stride length, stride frequency, and hand/arm action. (Little, & Williams,
2005)
Agility is the ability to maintain and control correct body position while quickly changing direction through a
series of movements (Twist & Benicky, 1995). This may be required of forwards in order to maneuver around defensive
players near the goal. Likewise, defensive players may benefit from these drills for the opposite reason. (Buttifant,
Graham, & Cross, 2002)
Quickness is the ability to read and react to a situation; it is a multidirectional skill that combines explosiveness,
reactiveness, and acceleration (Moreno, 1995). Goalies may specifically require responses that are initiated from a dead
stop position (Alves, Rebelo, Abrantes, & Sampaio, 2010; Chelly, Fathloun, Cherif, Amar, Tabka, & Van Praagh, 2009).

Impact Factor(JCC): 1.7843- This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

16

R. Arjunan

Speed, agility and quickness are a system of training aimed at the development of motor abilities and the control
of body movement through the development of the neuromuscular system (Lennemann, Sidrow, Johnson, Harrison, Vojta,
& Walker, 2013; Yap, & Brown, 2000). It aims to improve the athletes ability to perform explosive multi directional
movements by reprogramming the neuromuscular system, so that it can work more efficiently (Young, Davies, Farrow, &
Bahnert, 2013).. According to Jovanovic, Sporis,, Omrcen, & Fiorentini, (2011), SAQ training will remove mental blocks
and thresholds and will allow the athlete to exert maximal force during controlled and balanced movement patterns, which
are specific to their sport(Lennemann, Sidrow, Johnson, Harrison, Vojta, & Walker, 2013). By considering the energy
systems involved in the athletes sport, the specificity of the movement patterns, muscle action, the speed and range of
motions performed and the specific needs of the athlete, SAQ training can provide a highly specific and detailed training
method that will help the performer reach their goals (Polman, Bloomfield, & Edwards, 2009; Milanovi, Spori,
Trajkovi, James, & amija, 2013; Milanovi, Spori, Trajkovi, Sekuli, James, & Vukovi, 2014). In this modern era,
few scientific studies have been conducted to investigate effective methods of developing speed and agility conditioning
among school soccer players.

METHODOLOGY
The purpose of the study was to find out the Effect of Speed, Agility and Quickness (S.A.Q) training on selected
physical fitness variables among school soccer players. To archive this purpose of the study sixty soccer players from
Alagappa Model Higher Secondary School, Karaikudi, were selected as subjects at random. The subjects chosen for the
study were divided into four equal groups called control and experimental groups consisting of sixty students, each group
consists of fifteen students. They were assigned randomly into four groups (group I) underwent Speed training, (group II)
underwent Agility training, (group III) underwent Quickness training and (group IV) acted as control group. The
experimental groups was subjected to the training during morning hours for three days for six weeks and group IV acted as
control. The Speed, Agility and Quickness training was selected as independent variables and speed, muscular strength
endurance, agility and explosive power were selected as dependent variables. The selected dependent variables were
assessed by the standardized test items - 50mts run, bend knee sit ups, shuttle run and standing broad jump respectively.
The experimental design selected for this study was pre and post test randomized group design. The data were collected
from each subject before and after the training period and statistically analyzed by using analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA).

ANALYSIS OF DATA
The influence of Speed, Agility and Quickness training on each variable was analyzed separately and presented
below.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONSONS

Speed
The ANACOVA results on speed between control and experimental groups 1, 2 and 3 are presented in table 1.

Index Copernicus Value: 3.0 - Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Effect of Speed, Agility and Quickness (S.A.Q) Training on

Selected Physical Fitness Variables among School Soccer Players

17

Table 1: Analysis of Covariance of Pre-Test Post Test and Adjusted

Post Test Means on Speed of Different Groups (Scores in Seconds)
Speed

Group Mean
SD
G1
9.81
0.98
G2
9.63
0.89
Pre-test
G3
9.60
0.90
G4
9.74
0.69
G1
8.63
0.90
G2
8.80
0.92
Post-test
G3
9.06
0.94
G4
10.13 0.75
G1
8.54
0.90
G2
8.85
0.92
Adjusted
Post-test
G3
9.13
0.94
G4
10.10 0.77
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.

SV
BG
WG
T

SS
.815
20.478
5098.18

Df
3
56
59

MS
0.815
6.8

BG
WG
T

48.18
16.02
642.212

3
56
59

12.046
0.291

BG
WG
T

20.471
16.02
18.04

3
55
58

6.82
0.29

2.94

0.092

23.42

0.000*

22.42

0.000*

The pretest speed means score on speed of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 9.81, 9.63 9.60, and 9.74 respectively. The
posttest speed mean scores on speed of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 8.63, 8.80, 9.06, and 10.13 respectively. The adjusted
posttest speed mean scores on speed of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 8.5, 8.85, 9.13, and 10.10 respectively. There exist no
significant differences in the pretest speed mean scores of experimental and control groups (F=2.94, P=0.092>0.05). There
is significant mean differences in the posttest speed scores of experimental and control groups (F=23.42, P<0.05). Thee
exist significant mean difference between control and the three experimental groups adjusted posttest mean speed scores
(F=22.42, P<0.05). Since ANCOVA result showed significant difference in speed among groups, Scheffes post hoc test of
pair-wise comparisons has been carried out and the details are shown in Table II. In table II, Scheffes post hoc test results
are presented. It shows there existed significant difference between control and speed, agility and quickness training group,
whereas no significant difference was observed between speed and agility training group. Hence it is inferred that speed
can only developed by speed training compared to agility and quickness training.
Table 2: Pairwise Comparision of Control and
Experimental Groups 1, 2 and 3 on Speeds
Mean
Significance
Difference
G1
G2
0.309
0.023*
G1
G3
0.594
0.004*
G1
G4
1.560
0.000*
G2
G3
0.285
0.154
G2
G4
1.251
0.000*
G3
G4
.966
0.000*
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.
Group

Group

Results and Discussions on Muscular Strength Endurance

The ANACOVA results on speed between control and experimental groups 1, 2 and 3 are presented in table 3.
The pretest muscular strength endurance mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 17.13, 15.86, 15.66, and 15.80
respectively. The posttest muscular strength endurance mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 23.20, 21.46, 21.26, and
14.60 respectively. The adjusted posttest muscular strength endurance mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 21.94, 21.77,
21.82, and 11.99 respectively. There exist no significant differences in the pretest muscular strength endurance mean

Impact Factor(JCC): 1.7843- This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

18

R. Arjunan

scores of experimental and control groups (F=0.36, P=0.850>0.05). There is significant mean differences in the posttest
muscular strength endurance mean scores of experimental and control groups (F=57.62, P<0.05). Thee exist significant
mean difference between control and the three experimental groups adjusted posttest mean muscular strength endurance
mean scores (F=57.62, P<0.05).
Table 3: Analysis of Covariance of Pre-Test Post Test and Adjusted Post Test on
Muscular Strength Endurance of Different Groups (Scores in Counts)
MSE

Group Mean
SD
G1
17.13
4.51
G2
15.86
4.40
Pre-test
G3
15.66
3.86
G4
15.80
3.74
G1
23.20
5.29
G2
21.46
6.59
Post-test
G3
21.26
5.44
G4
14.60
4.03
G1
21.94
6.03
G2
21.77
5.58
Adjusted
Post-test
G3
21.82
6.45
G4
14.99
4.02
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.

SV
BG
WG
T

SS
.110
527.66
26612.0

Df
3
56
59

MS
.110
175.89

BG
WG
T

2123.06
167.86
26612.00

3
56
59

530.76
3.05

BG
WG
T

527.65
167.86
168.04

3
55
58

527.65
3.05

0.36

0.850

57.62

0.000*

57.62

0.000*

Since ANCOVA result showed significant difference in muscular strength endurance among groups, Scheffes
post hoc test of pair-wise comparisons has been carried out and the details are shown in Table 4. In table 4, Scheffes post
hoc test results are presented. It shows there existed significant difference in muscular strength endurance between control
and speed, agility and quickness training group, whereas no significant difference was observed between speed and agility
training group in muscular strength endurance. Hence it is inferred that muscular strength endurance can be developed by
speed, agility, and quickness training.
Table 4: Pairwise Comparision of Control and Experimental
Groups 1, 2 and 3 on Muscular Strength Endurance
Mean
P
Difference
G1
G2
.165
.000*
G1
G3
.177
.001*
G1
G4
6.949
0.000*
G2
G3
4.765
.007*
G2
G4
6.78
0.000*
G3
G4
6.83
0.000*
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.
Group

Group

Results and Discussionson Agility

The ANACOVA results on agility between control and experimental groups 1, 2 and 3 are presented in table 5.
The pretest agility mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 15.07, 15.14, 15.13, and 15.35 respectively. The posttest agility
mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 14.58, 14.20, 14.40, and 15.51 respectively. The adjusted posttest agility mean
scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 14.70, 14.23, 14.44, and 15.31 respectively. There exist significant differences in the
pretest agility mean scores of experimental and control groups (F=12.1, P>0.05). There is significant mean differences in
the posttest agility mean scores of experimental and control groups (F=78.42, P<0.05). Thee exist significant mean
Index Copernicus Value: 3.0 - Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Effect of Speed, Agility and Quickness (S.A.Q) Training on

Selected Physical Fitness Variables among School Soccer Players

19

difference between control and the three experimental groups adjusted posttest mean agility mean scores (F=78.42,
P<0.05).
Table 5: Analysis of Covariance of Pre-Test Post Test and Adjusted
Post Test on Agility of Different Groups (Scores in Seconds)
Agility

Group Mean
SD
G1
15.07
0.78
G2
15.14
0.67
Pre-test
G3
15.13
0.80
G4
15.35
0.62
G1
14.58
1.01
G2
14.20
0.64
Post-test
G3
14.40
0.89
G4
15.51
0.66
G1
14.70
0.68
G2
14.23
0.76
Adjusted
Post-test
G3
14.44
0.66
G4
15.31
0.65
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.

SV
BG
WG
T

SS
.501
9.74
12975.54

DF
3
56
59

MS
.501
3.24

F
12.10

P
0.001

BG
WG
T

50.46
2.27
12967.54

3
56
59

12.61
4.13

78.42

0.000*

BG
WG
T

9.73
2.27
12346.23

3
55
58

3.24
4.13

78.42

0.000*

Since ANCOVA result showed significant difference in agility among groups, Scheffes post hoc test of pair-wise
comparisons has been carried out and the details are shown in Table 6. In table 6, Scheffes post hoc test results are
presented. It shows there existed significant difference in agility between control and speed, agility and quickness training
group, whereas no significant difference was observed between speed and agility training group in muscular strength
endurance. Hence it is inferred that muscular strength endurance can be developed by speed, agility, and quickness
training.
Table 6: Pairwise Comparision of Control and
Experimental Groups 1, 2 and 3 on Agility
Mean
P
difference
G1
G2
0.467
0.000*
G1
G3
0.258
0.001*
G1
G4
0.614
0.000*
G2
G3
0.209
0.001*
G2
G4
1.082
0.000*
G3
G4
0.871
0.000*
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.
Group

Group

Results and Discussions on Explosive Power

The ANACOVA results on agility between control and experimental groups 1, 2 and 3 are presented in table 7.
Table 7: Analysis of Covariance of Pre-Test Post Test and Adjusted
Post Test on Explosive Power of Different Groups (Scores in Meters)
MSE
Pre-test
Post-test

Group
G1
G2
G3
G4
G1
G2

Mean
1.34
1.29
1.28
1.24
1.38
1.33

SD
0.10
0.72
0.12
0.11
0.11
0.10

SV
BG
WG
T

SS
1.44
4.50
105.12

DF
3
56
59

MS
1.44
1.50

BG
WG

0.83
3.04

3
56

0.209
5.536

2.61

0.112

27.11

0.000*

Impact Factor(JCC): 1.7843- This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

20

R. Arjunan

G3
1.32
0.11
G4
1.24
0.10
G1
1.33
0.11
G2
1.32
0.10
Post-test
G3
1.33
0.12
G4
1.27
0.16
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.

106.13

59

BG
WG
T

4.50
3.04
106.04

3
55
58

1.501
5.53

27.11

0.000*

The pretest explosive power mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 1.34, 1.29, 1.28, and 1.24 respectively. The
posttest explosive power mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 1.38, 1.33, 1.32, and 1.22 respectively. The adjusted
posttest explosive power mean scores of G1, G2, G3 and G4 are 1.33, 1.32, 1.33, and 1.27 respectively. There exist no
significant differences in the pretest explosive power mean scores of experimental and control groups (F2.61, P>0.05).
There is significant mean differences in the posttest explosive power mean scores of experimental and control groups
(F=27.11, P<0.05). Thee exist significant mean difference between control and the three experimental groups adjusted
posttest mean explosive power mean scores (F=27.11, P<0.05).
Since ANCOVA result showed significant difference in speed among groups, Scheffes post hoc test of pair-wise
comparisons has been carried out and the details are shown in Table8. In table 8, Scheffes post hoc test results are
presented. It shows there existed significant difference between Quickness training and control, speed, agility and training
group, whereas no significant difference was observed between control and speed, control and agility, speed and agility
training groups. Hence it is inferred that explosive power can only be developed by quickness training compared to agility
and speed training.
Table 8: Pairwise Comparision of Control and Experimental
Groups 1, 2 and 3 on Explosice Power
Mean
P
Difference
G1
G2
.01
0.400
G1
G3
.00
0.752
G1
G4
.06
0.000*
G2
G3
.01
0.241
G2
G4
.05
0.000*
G3
G4
.06
0.000*
* Significant at.05 level of confidence.
Group

Group

DISCUSSIONS ON FINDINGS
Speed, agility and quickness are important fitness components for a soccer player. The present study was
undertaken to find out speed, agility and quickness training improve agility, speed, muscular strength endurance and
explosive power which are also required for a elite soccer player. Speed training improves muscular strength endurance,
speed and explosive power. Agility training improves agility, muscular strength endurance only. Quickness training
improved agility, muscular strength endurance, speed and explosive power.

CONCLUSIONS
To improve soccer related fitness components no single type of training is sufficient. Speed, agility and quickness
training may be included in the training schedule of intermediary and elite soccer players.

Index Copernicus Value: 3.0 - Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us

Effect of Speed, Agility and Quickness (S.A.Q) Training on

Selected Physical Fitness Variables among School Soccer Players

21

REFERENCES
1.

Alves, J. M. V. M., Rebelo, A. N., Abrantes, C., & Sampaio, J. (2010). Short-term effects of complex and contrast
training in soccer players' vertical jump, sprint, and agility abilities. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 24(4), 936-941.

2.

Buttifant, D., Graham, K., & Cross, K. (2002). AGILITY AND SPEED IN SOCCER PLAYERS ARE TWO
DIFFERENT PERFORMANCE PARAMETERS. Science and football IV, 329.

3.

Chelly, M. S., Fathloun, M., Cherif, N., Amar, M. B., Tabka, Z., & Van Praagh, E. (2009). Effects of a back squat
training program on leg power, jump, and sprint performances in junior soccer players. The Journal of Strength &
Conditioning Research, 23(8), 2241-2249.

4.

J Bloomfield, R Polman, P O'DONOGHUE (2007) Effective speed and agility conditioning methodology for
random intermittent dynamic type sports. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 2007

5.

Jovanovic, M., Sporis, G., Omrcen, D., & Fiorentini, F. (2011). Effects of speed, agility, quickness training
method on power performance in elite soccer players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 25(5),
1285-1292.

6.

Lebedev, S. I. (2013). Determining the level of high-speed abilities of young soccer players aged from 10 to 12
years. Pedagogika, psihologia ta mediko-biologicni problemi fizicnogo vihovanna i sportu, 6.

7.

Lennemann, L. M., Sidrow, K. M., Johnson, E. M., Harrison, C. R., Vojta, C. N., & Walker, T. B. (2013). The
influence of agility training on physiological and cognitive performance. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning
Research, 27(12), 3300-3309.

8.

Little, T., & Williams, A. G. (2005). Specificity of acceleration, maximum speed, and agility in professional
soccer players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 19(1), 76-78.

9.

Milanovi, Z., Spori, G., Trajkovi, N., James, N., & amija, K. (2013). Effects of a 12 week saq training
programme on agility with and without the ball among young soccer players. Journal of sports science &
medicine, 12(1), 97.

10. Milanovi, Z., Spori, G., Trajkovi, N., Sekuli, D., James, N., & Vukovi, G. (2014). Does SAQ training
improve the speed and flexibility of young soccer players? A randomized controlled trial. Human movement
science, 38, 197-208.
11. Polman, R., Bloomfield, J., & Edwards, A. (2009). Effects of SAQ training and small-sided games on
neuromuscular functioning in untrained subjects. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 4(4), 494-505.
12. Thomas, K., French, D., & Hayes, P. R. (2009). The effect of two plyometric training techniques on muscular
power and agility in youth soccer players. The Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research, 23(1), 332-335.

Impact Factor(JCC): 1.7843- This article can be downloaded from www.impactjournals.us

22

R. Arjunan

13. Yap, C. W., & Brown, L. E. (2000). Development of speed, agility, and quickness for the female soccer athlete.
Strength & Conditioning Journal, 22(1), 9.
14. Young, W., Davies, M. J., Farrow, D., & Bahnert, A. (2013). Comparison of Agility Demands of Small-Sided
Games in Elite Australian Football. International Journal of Sports Physiology & Performance, 8(2).

Index Copernicus Value: 3.0 - Articles can be sent to editor@impactjournals.us